I was disappointed to read that Ray LaHood will be leaving as Secretary of Transportation, partly because it’s nice having one who’s personally familiar with infrastructure needs in my native central Illinois, but also because transportation is a great overlooked success story of the Obama administration. Who would have guessed that a Republican in the cabinet would bring so much joy to the hearts of tree-huggers and good planning gurus?

In an excellent Huffington Post interview, LaHood talks about high speed rail, bicycles, livable communities, and everyone owning an electric car by 2025. That puts him about ten years ahead of other central Illinois Republicans.

“Look, we are behind on high-speed rail,” he said. “But because of the president’s vision and because of the work of those of us here at DOT, we have come a long way … As long as President Obama is in the White House, whoever sits in this chair will have high-speed rail as one of their top priorities.”

In contrast, Republican Congressmen from downstate Illinois, including Aaron Schock, John Shimkus, and Bobby Schilling rode the wave of obstruction by speaking against high speed rail and voting against the rail stimulus funds that were spent in their district. Despite their lack of help, Amtrak trains on the Chicago-St. Louis line are now going faster, and their on-time performance has improved dramatically.

Small changes with big local impacts

LaHood gave the short definition of livable communities: “If you don’t want an automobile, you don’t have to have one.” That’s a revolutionary idea in many places like my hometown (Springfield, Illinois) where it’s nearly impossible to live and work if you don’t own a car. Changing the focus federally at Transportation has a huge impact on how cities conduct their planning and what sort of projects are funded.

For example, an outdated focus was a problem with Springfield’s community study on rail. They didn’t study which location was best for passenger rail, where a multi-modal transit center could spur the most economic growth, or which spot is more pedestrian friendly. They viewed rail only in terms of how it inconveniences automobile traffic. Nothing happens overnight, but the changes LaHood made at transportation will keep nudging backward looking officials with 30 year old ideas about transportation in a new direction as they make decisions for the future.

One of Obama’s best comments during the Presidential debates was that the long term solution on oil is to reduce demand. Otherwise, we can stop drilling on the Gulf Coast, but we’ll just get oil from tar sands or a country with even worse environmental protections instead. That’s one reason why several rounds of fuel efficiency and alternative fuel standards are so important. Continue reading Transportation will be one of Obama’s most enduring legacies. Thanks, Ray!

It felt like the movie never stopped. Hearing Schilling was no different than clips of speakers at tea party rallies. Except that Schilling had a calm crowd of about 20 people, half of which were suit-and-tie clad staffers for various Republican politicians.

One audience member asked Schilling why he supports high speed-rail. Schilling responded that he doesn’t favor it because there’s not enough money. He argued that Amtrak isn’t profitable and we should instead spend money on bridge and highway projects.

That got a lively response from another audience member who asked if he opposed funding for the new Amtrak line in his district from Chicago to Rock Island/Moline. Schilling became a little defensive and tried to engage the audience member in debate. “So, you’re an Amtrak supporter? Why do you think we need it?”

The guy in the audience said it’s a good economic development opportunity for the Quad Cities and asked if Schilling really favored walking away from the investment that has already been made on the rail line. Just when things started to get interesting a staffer said they were out of time (7 minutes early) and cut off discussion. In any case, it’s clear that Schilling opposes spending on passenger rail, despite the jobs and economic development benefits it would bring to the two largest communities in his district.